Well on my massive statistical sample of twelve people (so far) the results look pretty clear cut.

In the UK we drink more than everyone in the rest of the world.

(Wow ! With statistical analysis like that I should get a job as a journalist.)

Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum

Read all about my travels around the world here.

Since we have a greater range of beers, wines and spirits from which to choose than anywhere else in the world, that makes sense!

Richard English

RE noted that "we have a greater range of beers from which to choose"

And (sigh) a greater quality. Kalleh is doing market research for us.

I didn't want to rub it in...

Richard English

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard English:
Since we have a greater range of beers, wines and spirits from which to choose than anywhere else in the world, that makes sense!

Richard English

---

Jesus, R.E., this does NOT make any sense at all! Totally ignoring the highly debatable "fact" that you've got a wider variety of booze to choose from, the evidence (I hesitate to use the term "fact" here since I really don't know) that U.K. residents drink more alcohol on average than, say, the average U.S. citizen only shows one thing: that U.K. residents drink more alcohol on average than U.S. citizens.

I seriously doubt that if we had all your glorious brands of beer over here that our consumption levels would rise to what yours are today. There are easily a hundred other factors involved!

Seriously, R.E., you can be a tiresome old man sometimes. Every country has any number of qualities of which to be justifiably proud and, yes, England does make some fine beers. BUT! If you are under the impression that you can continually indulge in this petty America bashing without it finally getting old and prompting a response such as this one, you are obviously mistaken.

ALL of us enjoy your input regarding the English language which, excuse me if I'm mistaken, is the primary focus of this board, but as far as your British beer tirade is concerned, please, might we give it a break?!

CJ I think you may have missed part of the point of my first post on this thread.

What the results of my poll show is rather more limited than even you suggest. They show that the average amount of beer that the British who have responded say they drink is more than the average amount of beer that the others who have responded say that they drink.

No further conclusions at all can be drawn although others may seek to draw them nevertheless. Hence my remark that I should be a journalist - a breed who can draw any conclusion you like from any set of statistics that you like.

I know that this isn't strictly a language point but being a mathematician by training I get even more uptight about lack of numeracy than I do about lack of literacy.

(Incidentally I just spell checked this on my WP and it rejected the word "numeracy". I wonder why ?)

Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum

Read all about my travels around the world here.

Please read what I wrote before sounding off! I said that "we have a greater range of beers, wines and spirits from which to choose than anywhere else in the world"

The World includes other countries than England and the USA so you should not assume that I am "America-bashing" when I make this (accurate) statement. If I wanted to be rude about the USA (a country I have visted many times and consider I know quite well) there would be better and more accurate ways of doing so than by comparing the numbers of different kinds of drinks available.

So far as beer is concerned, the USA (following the massive and welcome rebellion against chemical fizz) now has some 1500 different kinds of beer. In the UK it's around 5000.

When I last visited a liquor store in the USA it was quite hard to find wines for other than the USA (primarily California); my local Safeway (a miniscule store by US standards) has wines from over thirty different countries.

The United Kingdom (and especially England) has been a trading nation for a millennium which is probably why we have such a wide choice of drink. That is a fact and it has nothing to do with bashing America or any other country.

If you read my several postings properly you will see that my ire has been directed against the likes of Anheuser Busch, not against the USA.

Richard English

First off, yes B.H., I fully agree that the tiny sampling this board offers your poll question is next to meaningless as far as drawing any significant conclusions is concerned. I believe that you had stated that the meager results here reflected results drawn from far larger polls conducted elsewhere. The British, for whatever reason (or reasonS), drink more beer than their American counterparts.

And R.E., by all accounts they also smoke far more as well. Does this reflect a higher quality of tobacco products available in the U.K.? I would suspect that there's more to it.

Regarding beer, you say there are 5,000 different kinds in the U.K. and about 1,500 in the U.S. This strikes me as odd but, beer expert that I accept you as, I'll question those figures only in how they were compiled. 5,000 different types of beer?? I'm reminded of the time I purchased what I thought was going to be a very helpful and informative book, titled something along the lines of "5,000 Different Sexual Positions." As you might imagine, sexual position #1,277 differed from #1,278 in that the woman's left big toe was bent at a 30 degree angle instead of extending straight out. Is British beer #1,277 that much different from #1,278?

Actually, that's a rhetorical question. I have long since spent what little interest I had in this subject. One suggestion, however, if you insist on droning on further on this subject - how about putting it in the form of a limerick on that applicable thread? Five more lines on the subject of British beer, even if they have you force feeding it to me, I suppose I could stand.

There was a young lady from Perth
Who added much more to her girth
By the swilling of beer
As she grinned ear to ear
That's my limerick for all that it's worth!

Hi Chris!

...welcome this beer...er...language forum.

Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum

Read all about my travels around the world here.

Trossl, welcome, welcome, welcome! It is always good to see a new face. We are a fun bunch and would love to see more of your posts. Loved your beer limerick!

quote:

---

that U.K. residents drink more alcohol on average than, say, the average U.S. citizen only shows one thing: that U.K. residents drink more alcohol on average than U.S. citizens.

---

First, CJ, can't we admit it that England has better beer/ale than the U.S.? I don't think the Brits would argue if we said our food was better (um, I hope I'm not opening another can of worms, here!) However, as for your comment above, to me the poll shows, to a limited extent because of the sample size, that people in the U.K. drink more beer than people in the U.S. Period. How in the world can you infer from that poll that it has anything to do with alcohol in general? My theory is that we do drink less beer (maybe because of the quality?), but we, instead, drink more wine.

[This message was edited by Kalleh on Sat Feb 1st, 2003 at 17:21.]

Welcome to the menagerie, Trossl! Love your limerick, by the way!

On the subject here, it may be true that the Brits have more to choose from, and may be true that it is of better quality, but the "fact" remains that those who participated in these surveys from the US, drink far less beer than those who participated in the survey from Britain. Since I do not drink and answered that I drank less than a pint a week (which is true, technically), even these results are a bit askew, as it more or less indicated that I do drink!

As my dear father says, "I don't drink any more." What he doesn't say is, "I don't drink any less either!"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalleh:
I don't think the Brits would argue if we said our food was better (um, I hope I'm not opening another can of worms, here!)

---

I don't know if you're opening a can of worms or not, Kalleh, but my son's British girl friend (from Cambridge, England) says their food is very bland.

Tinman

To further flog this hopefully soon to be dead horse...

Obviously any poll hosted by this website is going to be skewed due that most of our hardcore beer drinking American brothers are not able to use a computer in the first place. If they do, they would be surfing porn at thehun.net or snorting over the humor at The Manshow website. I think it would be a safe bet that your average trailerpark dwelling American male consumes at least as much if not more beer than their English counterparts. (Do they even have trailer parks in the UK?)

quote:

---

(Do they even have trailer parks in the UK?)

---

Welcome TrossL!

Yes, they exist over here, unfortunately. We call them caravan parks, however.

How can anyone say British food is bland? Why within a few minutes of my house I have Indian Restaurants, Thai Restaurants and Chinese Restaurants and if I go a little further afield I can find Mexican (good ones - not the Taco Bell !), Moroccan, French, Italian or Greek.

I'm hoping that one day I might even find an English one.


Joking aside though, English food is generally either bland or stodgy. (I thought about writing English Cuisine but it doesn't seem to merit so grand a word.)
Almost everywhere has better food.

I can't say that my travels in America revealed anything as nice as Indian or Chinese though. What exactly would you consider to be typical American Cuisine?
Maybe Kalleh can start a new thread and we can discuss food for a month or two.



Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum

Read all about my travels around the world here.

When I took a series of psychometric tests a few years ago, one of the things that they established was that it was in my nature to use facts, not emotions or feelings, to support an argument. One of the reasons why I walk away from arguments about religion or sport is simply that such arguments are based almost entirely on belief, not fact.

My input on beer is based on fact, not emotion or supposition and to clarify the point I made (you will recall that I mentioned that the UK came behind some other European countries) here are the figures for the top consumers on a litres per person, per year basis (the USA is the top consumer in total simply because of its greater population).

1 Czech Rep. 160.7
2 Ireland 152.8
3 Germany 127.5
4 Austria 108.9
5 Luxemburg 106.6
6 Denmark 104.6
7 U.K. 99.0
8 Belgium 97.7
9 Australia 95.0
10 Slovakia 86.4
11 Netherlands 85.3
12 USA 84.4

(Source Kirin Brewery survey 1999)

As I suggested, I believe our lesser consumption than other Northern European countries is due to our liking for wine as well as beer.

Cigarette smoking is more difficult to find out and it seems that the questionnaires use different bases. However, according to the Tobacco Marketing Association, consumption in the USA is estimated at between 650 and 5345 cigarattes per year and in the UK between 1871 and 2597. The wide spread for the USA would seem to imply lack of proper data but, notwithstanding this, CJ's assertion that "...by all accounts they smoke much more..." cannot be accepted as anything more than hearsay and I do not therefore feel that it is worthy of comment.

And finally, let me say, those who have never drunk proper beer are not able to make a judgement about its variety. There are more different kinds of beer than there are different kinds of wine - and nobody would argue that there aren't thousands of those.

Richard English

[This message was edited by Richard English on Sun Feb 2nd, 2003 at 5:44.]

[This message was edited by Richard English on Sun Feb 2nd, 2003 at 5:46.]

Again, this is a reflection on England's worldwide influence and history. Most towns, even quite small ones, have a wide range of "ethnic" restaurants.

As regards English food, though, it is a fact that "English" restaurants are not all that common. However, if you want to try some of the best, and best value, English food, try a good pub.

As regards its "blandness" I too have noticed the apparent lack of flavour in some English foods as compared with those of other countries and I suspect this is simply because they tend to be less highly spiced. Most "fast" foods (usually from restaurants of US origin) contain massive amounts of added salt, fat and other flavour enhancers and there has recently been much concern over increasing obesity in the UK - although this has not yet reached US levels.

Richard English

[This message was edited by Richard English on Sun Feb 2nd, 2003 at 7:18.]

quote:

---

I thought about writing English Cuisine but it doesn't seem to merit so grand a word.

---

Perhaps you ought to post it in the oxymorons thread?

Some of the highlights of English Cuisine have been mentioned here before: Toad in the Hole, Spotted Dick, faggots, and tripe, for instance. If we expand northwards to Scotland we can also sample such epicurean delights as haggis and deep-fried Mars bars.

Although I accept Haggis (not too bad, actually, with a generous measure of malt whisky) surely deep-fried Mars bars are a US invention?

The Mars company is a US family firm, and, does my memory not serve me aright - were not deep-fried Mars bars one of Elvis Presley's favourites? (And one which led to his terminal obesity?)

Richard English

quote:

---

Maybe Kalleh can start a new thread and we can discuss food for a month or two.

---

No thanks, Bob! I did try recently, rather unsuccessfully I might add, to start a food words thread (apostrophe?), but I found basically I was answering myself. The worst of it is, I have a whole lot more good food words!

Immediately after I posted about English food, I realized not only was I being arrogant, but I was also being ignorant. While I have had variations of English food here prepared by our English friends (delicious, I might add), I have never even been to England so what kind of a judge can I be! Sorry. I will change it to the fact that America has better entertainment in the sports of basketball, hockey, American football, and baseball. There couldn't possibly be any dispute about that!

I had not really intended to offend our Brits on this forum. I agree with Richard that it is important to base an argument on facts, and not emotion. I did the latter. Furthermore, American cuisines are really quite eclectic, which is precisely why I like them. While there is a definite southern cuisine, New England cuisine (blah!), and western cuisine, I think (not based on fact, though!) that our country does a better job than any other in specializing in cuisines from around the world.

I have not researched, but I can't say, in my visits to the USA, that I had noticed this.

London has a vast range of different cuisines and even small towns like Reigate, where I live, has Italian, Indian, Thai, Nepalese, Chinese, French and English restaurants - plus several pubs, of course. Fast food restaurants, such as Macdonald's, I have not counted in the total, but we have those as well.

I am not suggesting the US cuisine is anything other than good; just that English cuisine, and the range of ethnic cuisines we have, is also commendable.

Richard English

quote:

---

surely deep-fried Mars bars are a US invention?

---

I suspect that is one invention that not too many countries will rush to claim as theirs. However, it was invented in Aberdeen, Scotland.

Interestingly, UK and US Mars bars differ somewhat in their recipe; see here.

Scotland has a reputation for being the "heart attack capital of the World" because of its acknowledged high fat/high sugar diet. However, this is slightly unfair because its rate for death from cardio-vascular diseases (amongst both men and women) is only slightly higher than that of the USA (432 per 100,000 as compared with 348).

The highest rate for CVD deaths is in Romania, where 817 men in every 100,000 die each year.

Richard English

quote:

---

The highest rate for CVD deaths is in Romania, where 817 men in every 100,000 die each year.

---

Obviously a reflection of the vastly superior CVD equipment found in Romanian hospitals.

(And R.E., before you harumph yourself into a conniption fit while serching the web for the latest info on Romanian hospital equipment, allow me to save you the bother. My above statement is what is referred to as "humor," as in something not to be taken seriously, and I only spell it out for you here since you've missed so many similar examples in the past. It's the Margaret Dumount in you, something we all find endearing.)

Cigarettes... No, I don't have the facts and figures at my fingertips (alliteration thread, anyone?) and, frankly, don't want to bother surfing the web for them. I had watched a PBS special a while back about how U.S. cigarette companies are relying more and more on exporting this vile habit to third world nations in order to continue to turn a profit now that U.S. consumption is way down and continues to decline. Plus the anecdotal evidence is massive. In the states, cigarette smokers rate just below lepers and telemarketers on the "People Whose Company We Enjoy" list.

Conversely, while I lived in Germany I was astounded at the huge percentage of people who puffed away everywhere I turned. Everyone seemed to get far more physical exercise than the average American but the intake of fatty foods (The national bird is the bratwurst) and tobacco was immense! I once mentioned to a friend that there seemed to be no "No Smoking" areas in the entire country. He asked "In Germany, you can smoke in a restaurant?" and I replied "In Germany, you can smoke in an oxygen tent!" An exaggeration, but a slight one. TrossL'll back me up on that one, I bet.

Sidenote: Try saying "TrossL'll" out loud. Sounds like your trying to start an old car with a near-dead battery.

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Kalleh:
Trossl, welcome, welcome, welcome! Loved your beer limerick! [QUOTE]

Ditto, Ditto, Ditto.



[QUOTE] First, CJ, can't we admit it that England has better beer/ale than the U.S.? [QUOTE]

Actually, no, I can't. This is a subjective matter and one could even go so far as to argue that the best beer in the world would logically be the one most often bought by the beer-drinking public. This, of course, would be Budweiser. I am not making this argument myself because
1. I don't believe it for a minute, and
2. To do so would only give R.E. a brain aneurysm and then who would I have left to aggravate?

It's all a matter of personal choice. If you like Budweiser, R.E. and I may both consider you a troglodyte but go in peace and enjoy your damn Bud. Personally, I think German beers run rings around all the rest (more rings around the American than the British but still...) but I freely admit to not having sampled a huge variety of any nation's brews. In Ecuador I once had some beer that came in a bottle about as big as my thigh, cost about a buck, and tasted great! And the only thing that this "proves" is that I like Ecuadorian beer more than I do Budweiser.



[QUOTE] I don't think the Brits would argue if we said our food was better (um, I hope I'm not opening another can of worms, here!) [QUOTE]

Unless British food is truly revolting, this is a mixed metaphor. Then again, open the can of worms and serve it with a sauce atop and you've got French Cuisine as far as I'm concerned but that's another matter entirely.


Doesn't anyone want to talk about the English language any more??

Well, folks, I can just tell you that it is downhill after your 1,000th post. I don't think I have ever apologized so much in my life!

CJ, let's agree to disagree, then. In my humble opinion England has better beer than the United States. I have never been there, but I have been reading the intricacies of beer making posted by Richard, and I just have to believe him. I have 2 English beers on order (Fuller's 1845 & Hog's Back T.E.A.) and will know more by the end of the week.

However, as a nurse researcher who has worked extensively with dyspnea and lung disorders, I do have to agree with CJ that reports say that Europe (I have no breakdowns) has more cigarette smokers, per capita, than America. I believe also the incidence of lung cancer is higher, too, but I am not positive. After all, lung cancer is also highly dependent on air pollution.

Lastly, Richard, yes, we do have fast food restaurants in the United States, but we have so much more! The ethnic diversity in Chicago alone amazes me. In Chicago's Uptown area alone, there are 80 different languages spoken (and that is a fact, not a guess). The Chicago restaurants reflect that diversity. We have enjoyed at least 50 different ethnic cuisines--from Afghanistan to Cuban to Brazilian to Persian to Vietnamese. There is a Chinatown and several blocks with Indian and Jewish restaurants. Since Chicago has the second largest Polish population of any city in the world, Polish restaurants are common. And I am talking about authentic cuisines.

I am not sure how that compares to England's restaurants because unfortunately I have not been to England. Therefore, I shouldn't have made that food comparison comment.

You're right, CJ, from now on it will be all language for me. Once again, sorry for not keeping posts about words.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard English:
My input on beer is based on fact, not emotion or supposition...

---

I must respectfully disagree with you here, Richard. While much of what you say about beer may be fact, one thing is not. It is not a fact that one beer is better than another. It is a value judgement, a matter of personal preference. Your insistence that one beer is better than another has taken on an emotional fervor.

To prove that one thing is "better" than another, you must first define what constitutes "better". "Better" in the case of beer, involves taste, which is highly subjective and emotional, and cannot be proven.

Tinman

I agree 100%.

My offence was lack of clarity in my use of language, and for that I deserve to be pilloried, I agree.

When I talked about my input about beer I was not referring to my comments about its flavour of quality or, indeed, any other aspect of the product. My comment was simply about that particular posting where I was speaking of worldwide beer consumption. CJ claimed that more beer was consumed on a per capita basis in the USA than in the UK; that statement is wrong and that, and only that, was the aspect of fact to which I referred.

It is my belief that the top-consuming countries drink more beer than the lesser-consuming countries simply because the choice and quality of the beer is better. However, without more research this cannot be stated as a fact; it is, however, a reasonable hypothesis.

Richard English

Anecdotal evidence - now there's an oxymoron for you!

According to the latest WHO and CIA figures that I have been able to find, lung cancer deaths in the USA among males are slightly higher that those in the UK, although all agree that smoking is rapidly becoming less common in the USA (as it is in the UK).

Among European countries the UK is about in the middle for lung cancer deaths.

Cigarette manufacturers in the USA are now targetting "third world" countries, we know, but this has not affected smoking in the UK. With the world's fourth largest economy we are not really "third world"! Cigarette manufacturers here are targetting the third world as well.

Incidentally, Kalleh, one of the problems that people have in the USA is that of appreciating that Europe is a continent, not a country, and has a greater diversity of peoples, attitudes and behaviours than any other continent. Thus is it not realistic to compare US lung cancer deaths with European lung cancer deaths - it should only be done by country. In Sweden male deaths are 35.5 per 100,000 whereas in Hungary they are 117.1. The USA's rate is higher than Sweden but lower than Hungary.

Richard English

[This message was edited by Richard English on Tue Feb 4th, 2003 at 2:32.]

I realize, Richard, that Europe is a continent and not a country.

However, the statistics I have seen never specifically compare U.K. to the U.S. for cigarette smoking, though I have seen comparisons to Europe in general. Oftentimes, though, they will then do some individual comparisons of countries.

Incidentally, in the U.S. lung cancer is the leading killer of all cancer deaths for both men and women. The rise in lung cancer in women has been especially alarming.

OK, OK! Break it up, Break it up!!

My, my! Like the man with an undersized scrotum said, "Things are getting a little testy here!"

Kalleh, I did not mean to come down overly-hard on you (or, to use R.E.'s excellent term, to pillory you) regarding not sticking strictly to the topic of language in your posts. We're all going off on all sorts of tangents - I'm establishing my own kingdom on a Jovian moon, for God's sake! This is precisely what makes this board more enjoyable than others which supply only a strict diet of questions regarding "St. James's' CD's" or whatever. I'm completely sated on the topic of beer, but that's just me.

Now. Having said that, your last post implies that you are basing your preference for British beer solely based on R.E.'s statements and websites?? Say it ain't so!

And lastly, but NEVER leastly, R.E.:

quote:

---

CJ claimed that more beer was consumed on a per capita basis in the USA than in the UK.

---

I truly and sincerely and beyond the tiniest shadow of the smallest doubt DO NOT believe I said that! Why not? I totally do not believe it in the least! IF I ever posted that Americans drink more per capita than our British bretheren, PLEASE tell me where you read that and I'll immediately go back and amend it.

It had to have been a typo. My last glass of wine was two weeks ago, my last beer maybe six months, and I've been doobie-free for some three years so it can't have been anything along those lines.

quote:

---

Kalleh, I did not mean to come down overly-hard on you (or, to use R.E.'s excellent term, to pillory you) regarding not sticking strictly to the topic of language in your posts.

---

I know, CJ. I was a bit out of sorts last night...and cranky (testy?) besides.

C.J. Sorry, I was wrong.

It was a combination of the implications of several postings (including one that referred to the beer consumption of trailer-park denizens that confused me).

Kalleh,

I appreciate that you will know that Europe is a continent. Sadly, as you have highlighted, many statisics quote "European" statistics when the figures are just nonsense when averaged. It is even more silly than quoting "America" and then assuming that the statistics apply to Canada, the USA and all of Central and South America.

Europe, although smaller than the American landmass. is a far more diverse continent in almost every respect. Less than a hundred miles from me right now there are countries that have four different native languages (none of them English). Although there are many languages spoken in the USA, the "official" language is English across the entire country.

And that's just language. Take just about any other aspect of life and culture and it will also be different country by country.

Statisticians who seek to average out anything "Europe-wide" are wasting their own, and everyone else's, time.

Richard English

Given the turn the thread has taken recently I thought I'd refer back to this previous thread.

Purgamentum init, exit purgamentum

Read all about my travels around the world here.

Yes, I see that you both are right--the European countries should not be clustered when collecting data. And, I agree that we in the U.S. probably do too much of that.

On another front in this diverse thread, I respectfully must disagree with you, Tinman. While I agree that taste is subjective, it most certainly can be rated as poor, mediocre, good, and best--just as restaurants, hotels, universities, etc. are rated. Respected experts in the fields who know the intricacies of the product, get together and rate products. We don't always agree with individual ratings, but we certainly do respect them. For example, U.S. News and World Reports annually rates univerisities, based on categories rated by experts. Schools like Harvard, Yale and Princeton stand out. Surely, if you were sending your child to a university, with all else being equal, you would choose Harvard over Loyola University, Chicago. Or--if you were choosing a restaurant, you would choose a 5-star one over MacDonald's. Or--you would probably choose Richard's Rolls-Royce over my Honda Accord. The same could, if it doesn't already exist, occur with choosing beers. Experts in the field would rate them. Having had, last night for the first time, one of Richard's Hog's Back T.E.A.s--I would most certainly expect it to be much higher rated than any of our beers. Richard, it was in one word: exquisite! (And, Shufitz agrees with me.)

[This message was edited by Kalleh on Wed Feb 5th, 2003 at 8:51.]

T.E.A. is a very good beer and gets high ratings in the many competitions we hold here. There are, though, many other bottled beers that are equally good.

To refer to the "better than" thread, I would mention that we do have a "champion beer of Britain" competition every year at the Great British Beer Festival (a good time to visit us - probably around a thousand different beers to try under the one roof).

The champion for several years in the bottled beer category has been Fuller's 1845, which I have mentioned as being my favourite. It will be interesting to hear your own views on how you feel it compares with T.E.A.

Richard English

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalleh:
On another front in this diverse thread, I respectfully must disagree with you, Tinman. While I agree that taste is subjective, it most certainly can be rated as poor, mediocre, good, and best--just as restaurants, hotels, universities, etc. are rated. Respected experts in the fields who know the intricacies of the product, get together and rate products. We don't always agree with individual ratings, but we certainly do respect them. For example, U.S. News and World Reports annually rates univerisities, based on categories rated by experts. Schools like Harvard, Yale and Princeton stand out. Surely, if you were sending your child to a university, with all else being equal, you would choose Harvard over Loyola University, Chicago. Or--if you were choosing a restaurant, you would choose a 5-star one over MacDonald's. Or--you would probably choose Richard's Rolls-Royce over my Honda Accord. The same could, if it doesn't already exist, occur with choosing beers. Experts in the field would rate them.

---

Yes, Kalleh, taste can be rated. Taste in beers refers primarily to the senses of taste and smell, while taste in universities and cars do not (unless you count the new-car smell). Richard said that all his beer information was based on fact, and I merely pointed out that whether or not one beer was “better” than another was a matter of preference, not fact. A group of beer experts may decide that a certain beer is “better” than another, but this is a consensus, rather than a fact. Some may prefer the taste of Buttwiper to English ale, and that is their prerogative. Some may think both are equally revolting, and that is their prerogative. Neither are facts. I said taste in beer refers primarily to the senses of taste and smell. Other factors that may influence a person’s taste are culture, color, temperature, even the country of origin.

Let me explain that last point. Despite what some on this board may think, I’m not picking on the English. There are those who think everything their country produces is superior simply because they produce it. The Japanese even use different words for a product based on its country of origin. Japanese rice is gohan (which also means “meal”), while rice from any other country is raisu. For years US cars were considered among the best in the world. When their quality began to slide and the quality of Japanese cars began to rise, US automakers continued to maintain that US cars were superior, largely because they were US made. Remember the “Buy American” campaign? In short, misguided patriotism (or snobbery, or whatever you want to call it) sometimes causes people from many, perhaps all, countries to consider their products superior to anyone else’s. Sometimes they know better but they buy their own country’s product anyway, simply because it is domestic.

Taste in food is comparable to taste in beer, in that it is primarily based on the senses of taste and smell. Color and texture also influence food preference.

There is also a cultural influence. While Americans love hamburgers, Indians are horrified at the thought of eating a cow. In many cultures people eat horse, dog or goat meat. Most Americans would not even consider it. Americans a hundred or so years ago used to eat opossum, but I doubt that many do now. Many Americans have never tasted chitlins (pig intestines) or Rocky Mountain oysters (testicles from various animals), and would never dream of eating them. They have no idea how they taste, only what they are. Many Americans have grown up drinking ice-cold beer with an insipid taste and like it that way. Taste in beer and foods is subjective.

A five-star restaurant may be considered “better” than a fast-food restaurant, such as Micky D (McDonald’s), but that too is a subjective observation, not a factual one. Some prefer the taste of a soggy Micky D hamburger to an extra-fat sirloin steak. The ratings of a restaurant consider things that have nothing to do with the taste of the food, things such as cleanliness, service, and “ambience”. The healthfulness of the food is rarely considered.

Taste in automobiles is a different matter. It has little to do with the senses of taste and smell. Rather, it is based on things such as looks, power, price, fuel economy, comfort, safety, reliability and status. Sometimes taste in cars is completely irrational. Some people will drive anything, as long as it’s a Chevy. For others a Ford, or Dodge, or Buick is the only “real” car. Automakers and dealers depend on such brand loyalty.

Colleges and Universities are rated, not on “taste”, but on dubious qualities. They are sometimes highly subjective and certainly don’t constitute facts.

COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY RANKINGS, Education and Social Science Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(http://www.library.uiuc.edu/edx/rankings.htm)

Ignore College Ranking -- Become an Educated Consumer by Shirley Levin, M.A. (http://www.washingtonparent.com/articles/9712/rankings.htm)

RANKINGS CAUTION AND CONTROVERSY, Education and Social Science Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (http://www.library.uiuc.edu/edx/rank_biblio.html)

IP Specialty Rankings in U.S. News & World Report, Thomas G. Field, Jr., Franklin Pierce Law Center (http://www.fplc.edu/tfield/usnwr.htm)

Peterson’s College Rankings (http://www.petersons.com/about/ranking.html)

I stand by my previous statement that matters of taste are opinions, not facts.

Tinman

[This message was edited by tinman on Sat Feb 8th, 2003 at 23:35.]

[This message was edited by tinman on Sun Feb 9th, 2003 at 17:29.]

As I have already said, my statement of fact in the posting to refer to was about beer consumption, not beer taste. Taste is an individual thing, I agree.

I would suggest, though, that if a thousand people sampled the thing (be it beer or anything else) and 900 of them rated it good and the other 100 bad, there would be grounds for saying that the preferred one was "better", even if the aspect being considered was a subjective one like colour, smell or taste.

Richard English

Well, okay, Tinman, I agree that the rating of taste isn't a fact. I must have misunderstood your point. I thought you had said that matters of opinion cannot be rated--or considered as average, better, best.

BTW, while I agree that university choices are not tastes, they are matters of opinions that can be rated-and they are frequently rated in many different publications.